resolve_proxy

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'download and parse' but omits critical details such as whether the tool is read-only, side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand full implications.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence and front-loads the action, but it is overly terse. It could be expanded to include necessary details without becoming verbose, balancing brevity with clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should explain return values and parsing behavior. It does not specify what 'parse' entails or the format of the result, leaving the agent without enough context to use the tool effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with a single parameter described. The tool description adds general context that the path refers to a proxy page fragment, but does not elaborate on format constraints or usage beyond the schema. Baseline value of 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description states the tool downloads and parses internal university proxies and lists file types, clearly indicating the resource and action. While it distinguishes from siblings like 'resolve_material_link', the term 'proxies' could be ambiguous without further context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'resolve_material_link' or 'get_course_content'. The description does not provide context for appropriate invocation or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.